Because... Abraham was kind of a jerk.

Let’s look at the story of Abraham first of all. He was rich and prosperous in the city of Ur until God told him to leave. He packs up everything and heads out into the wild toward Canaan with all of his people.

We’re going to focus on one of the most important parts of his life: His attempted sacrifice of his son Isaac. Let’s reread the story from Genesis 22:1-13 out of the New World Translation:

22 Now after this the true God put Abraham to the test, and he said to him: “Abraham!” to which he replied: “Here I am!” 2 Then he said: “Take, please, your son, your only son whom you so love, Isaac, and travel to the land of Mo·ri′ah and offer him up there as a burnt offering on one of the mountains that I will designate to you.”
3 So Abraham got up early in the morning and saddled his donkey and took two of his servants along with him and his son Isaac. He split the wood for the burnt offering, and then he rose and traveled to the place that the true God indicated to him. 4 On the third day, Abraham looked up and saw the place from a distance. 5 Abraham now said to his servants: “You stay here with the donkey, but the boy and I will go over there and worship and return to you.”
6 So Abraham took the wood for the burnt offering and put it on his son Isaac. Then he took in his hands the fire and the knife, and the two of them walked on together. 7 Then Isaac said to his father Abraham: “My father!” He replied: “Yes, my son!” So he continued: “Here are the fire and the wood, but where is the sheep for the burnt offering?” 8 To this Abraham said: “God himself will provide the sheep for the burnt offering, my son.” And both of them walked on together.
9 Finally they reached the place that the true God had indicated to him, and Abraham built an altar there and arranged the wood on it. He bound his son Isaac hand and foot and put him on the altar on top of the wood. 10 Then Abraham reached out his hand and took the knife to kill his son. 11 But Jehovah’s angel called to him from the heavens and said: “Abraham, Abraham!” to which he answered: “Here I am!” 12 Then he said: “Do not harm the boy, and do not do anything at all to him, for now I do know that you are God-fearing because you have not withheld your son, your only one, from me.” 13 At that Abraham looked up, and there just beyond him was a ram caught by its horns in a thicket. So Abraham went and took the ram and offered it up as a burnt offering in place of his son.

All right, so first of all, let’s leave aside the fact that God decided to “test” Abraham by having him offer up his son. Speaking as a father, it's an unspeakable decision, but I digress.

Here’s how the Society explains this story: This was a prophetic parallel to Jehovah offering up Jesus. Isaac did this willingly, understanding that Jehovah could resurrect him, and in their paintings and illustrations they depict Isaac as an equal partner in this relationship. In other words, this was Isaac's choice all along.

However, that’s reading a little too much into the Bible account. Let’s look again:

7 Then Isaac said to his father Abraham: “My father!” He replied: “Yes, my son!” So he continued: “Here are the fire and the wood, but where is the sheep for the burnt offering?” 8 To this Abraham said: “God himself will provide the sheep for the burnt offering, my son.” And both of them walked on together.

Um.

Here was Abraham’s chance to come clean, and the Bible specifically states that he didn’t. The Society counters with, “Of course he told Isaac eventually at some point while they were heading up the mountain.” However, that’s not in the Bible account. That’s inferring more into the text than is actually there.

So why would they feel the need to assume that Isaac eventually found out on the way up to the mountain? Because the other option is horrifying. Read on:

9 Finally they reached the place that the true God had indicated to him, and Abraham built an altar there and arranged the wood on it. He bound his son Isaac hand and foot and put him on the altar on top of the wood.

We've established that the Bible specifically states that Abraham did not tell Isaac that he was the main course. If Isaac was not aware of the reason for his being there, how could Abraham have “bound” Isaac? It would have had to be by force, right?

But if Isaac was a full-grown man, how could Abraham have bound him? Abraham was over 100 years old at this point, and it would have been a hard fight for him to win.

So, in order for Isaac to be “bound” by Abraham, he would have had to be younger. How young? 18? An 18-year-old could conceivably outmaneuver an old man. Younger than that? 14? 12? 10?

Applying just a little bit of reasoning to this story: Abraham lied to his young son, forcibly bound him, then got this close to slaughtering him just because God told him to.

This is a strong claim, to be sure. Is there any evidence for this interpretation? Yeah, kind of.

We notice that after this story in the Bible, we see that Isaac and Abraham aren’t referred to together anymore. Abraham goes looking for a wife for Isaac, but it doesn’t appear that Isaac requested it. When he meets Rebekah, he’s walking around in a field, still missing his mother who’s been dead for a few years. We have no record of him mourning Abraham as much. The only record we have is him and Ishmael burying Abraham, and that’s it.

This also informs Isaac's own relationship with his sons. You’ll notice, Rebekah was the one pissed off at Esau for the Canaanite women, not Isaac. Why would Isaac be so close to Esau and let him marry Canaanite women? Why would Isaac want to bless Esau all the time? Why wouldn’t he be as fond of Jacob? Maybe it’s because he had a bad experience with Jehovah and wasn’t really fond of him.

“But Isaac wasn’t actually sacrificed! That proves that Jehovah was loving!” Does it? What if I hold a loaded gun to your head, put my finger on the trigger, then take it away? Does that make it any less terrifying for you? Will I get arrested for it or not? Will you call me loving afterwards?

There are a lot of “maybes” in this interpretation, certainly. But there are basically two choices with this account:

1. Abraham and Isaac were both willing participants in this drama, even though there’s no evidence to back it up. This requires a large leap of logic based on no evidence, and just assumes that Jehovah wouldn’t ask someone to do something so terrible.
2. Abraham and Isaac were unequal partners in this drama, with an unaware Isaac being forced into a terrifying sacrifice.

If you assume that Jehovah is loving, which most Witnesses do, then it’s easy to pick option 1. It’s easy to overlook the lack of evidence and just say, “Look, even though the Bible doesn’t say this expressly, we can assume that it happened because otherwise God wouldn’t be loving.” However, that’s what we call a tautological argument. It’s like saying, “I’m the authority in this house because I say I am, so therefore I’m the authority in this house.” It’s advancing your argument by citing the argument as proof.

I’m not so sure, myself. If Abraham is cited as God’s Friend, well, Abraham is kind of a jerk.